I believe we can all do our bit to promote Puppy Linux from time to time by offering thoughtful, informed, and respectful comments in response to articles that appear in blogs, and reviews etc. regarding any of the Puppy versions.

A case in point: two days ago (Dec. 17th) there was an article written called "Puppy Linux Racy Review" at http://gnuman.com/?p=116 in which the author described some of the features of Puppy, offered some of his impressions, and yet he never once referred to Racy in his review nor did he give any explanation as to what defines Racy in comparison to any of the other Puppy versions.

Overall, I felt his review fell short of its objective, and that his lack of information regarding Racy was less than helpful or useful to anyone wanting specific details about this particular version of Puppy. So, I decided to post a comment in attempt to set the record a little straighter, which you can read if you go to the link that I have provided. To his credit, the author acknowledged my post and the correctness of the points I made.

It would be great to see the author write an updated review of Racy to make up for the shortcomings of his article... but for a variety of possible reasons I can think of, I doubt that will ever happen.

Cheers,
WayneLast edited by Monsie on Mon 02 Jan 2012, 02:42; edited 1 time in total

Update: I am re-submitting my post dated December 19th because I tried to edit it for proof reading purposes, and ended up deleting the entry by mistake.

Monsie

Hi all,

I believe we can all do our bit to promote Puppy Linux from time to time by offering thoughtful, informed, and respectful comments in response to articles that appear in blogs, and reviews etc. regarding any of the Puppy versions.

A case in point: two days ago (Dec. 17th) there was an article written called "Puppy Linux Racy Review" at http://gnuman.com/?p=116 in which the author described some of the features of Puppy, offered some of his impressions, and yet he never once referred to Racy in his review nor did he give any explanation as to what defines Racy in comparison to any of the other Puppy versions.

Overall, I felt his review fell short of its objective, and that his lack of information regarding Racy was less than helpful or useful to anyone wanting specific details about this particular version of Puppy. So, I decided to post a comment in attempt to set the record a little straighter, which you can read if you go to the link that I have provided. To his credit, the author acknowledged my post and the correctness of the points I made.

It would be great to see the author write an updated review of Racy to make up for the shortcomings of his article... but for a variety of possible reasons I can think of, I doubt that will ever happen.

Cheers,
Wayne

Note: I closed the post with my first name so that one could make reference to my comment regarding the article "Puppy Linux Racy Review".Last edited by Monsie on Mon 02 Jan 2012, 02:52; edited 1 time in total

Update: I am re-submitting my post dated December 19th because I tried to edit it for proof reading purposes, and ended up deleting the entry by mistake.

Monsie

Hi all,

I believe we can all do our bit to promote Puppy Linux from time to time by offering thoughtful, informed, and respectful comments in response to articles that appear in blogs, and reviews etc. regarding any of the Puppy versions.

A case in point: two days ago (Dec. 17th) there was an article written called "Puppy Linux Racy Review" at http://gnuman.com/?p=116 in which the author described some of the features of Puppy, offered some of his impressions, and yet he never once referred to Racy in his review nor did he give any explanation as to what defines Racy in comparison to any of the other Puppy versions.

Overall, I felt his review fell short of its objective, and that his lack of information regarding Racy was less than helpful or useful to anyone wanting specific details about this particular version of Puppy. So, I decided to post a comment in attempt to set the record a little straighter, which you can read if you go to the link that I have provided. To his credit, the author acknowledged my post and the correctness of the points I made.

It would be great to see the author write an updated review of Racy to make up for the shortcomings of his article... but for a variety of possible reasons I can think of, I doubt that will ever happen.

Cheers,
Wayne

Monsie/Wayne, to display urls, highlight the link, click the url button, and ensure that the link is surrounded by url and /url bracketed terms, all on one line, or without line break, if longer...that should work...I edited yours to show active

Thanks for your help. That is exactly what I was trying to do, but somehow I managed to delete my original post, and when I submitted an update, it got deleted also. I don't know what happened there. Maybe John can restore my original post on December 19th, because there is no content change... all I wanted to do was to change the url so that it would appear as a link.

Monsie

Update: I have properly edited and restored my posts as per your instructions --thanks again Last edited by Monsie on Mon 02 Jan 2012, 03:31; edited 1 time in total

19th Dec post, with corrected link, or it won't display
Use quote to view it, or edit to change it

Monsie wrote:

Hi all,

I believe we can all do our bit to promote Puppy Linux from time to time by offering thoughtful, informed, and respectful comments in response to articles that appear in blogs, and reviews etc. regarding any of the Puppy versions.

A case in point: two days ago (Dec. 17th) there was an article written called "Puppy Linux Racy Review" at http://gnuman.com/?p=116 in which the author described some of the features of Puppy, offered some of his impressions, and yet he never once referred to Racy in his review nor did he give any explanation as to what defines Racy in comparison to any of the other Puppy versions.

Overall, I felt his review fell short of its objective, and that his lack of information regarding Racy was less than helpful or useful to anyone wanting specific details about this particular version of Puppy. So, I decided to post a comment in attempt to set the record a little straighter, which you can read if you go to the link that I have provided. To his credit, the author acknowledged my post and the correctness of the points I made.

It would be great to see the author write an updated review of Racy to make up for the shortcomings of his article... but for a variety of possible reasons I can think of, I doubt that will ever happen.

Posted: Sun 22 Jan 2012, 08:07 Post subject:
This is a bit odd, but...Subject description: I own a site that may get mistake hits, LNUX.COM

Way back in 1999, April actually, I could see a Linux IPO coming. Well it happened and it was VA Linux. They used the ticker symbol LNUX, just as I knew someone probably would. When the IPO occurred about 6 months later, it made history as the highest pop ever -- Wikipedia can confirm this.

Anyway, it's just sitting at GoDaddy. I'd be happy to offer it to Puppy if it is something that might be appropriate. I really think the other distros are going to have to face the fact that their moster-sized ISO's are not cutting it anymore.

Raspberry Pi posted a link about the remaster of Racy I put together and I got 504 hits on my page!
I've also created an fb page for RacyPy2. Hopefully we will see some more Puppy Users as a result!_________________My System:Arch-Arm on RPi!
"RacyPy" puplet on Toshiba Tecra 8200. PIII, 256 MB RAM.
RaspberryPy: Lobster and I blog about the RPi.

I had an idea here http://aronzak.wordpress.com/2008/12/29/usb-linux-challenge/

1 Buy a few cheap usb flash drives
2 Put Linux on them
3 Give them out
4. If someone likes what they see, they can have a copy. If not, no harm done.
If you get the drive back, repeat from step 3.

What do you think?

How about the newbies that do not know how to run puppy linux??

It only needs about 1 hour to teach a person to use Puppy, if they have any computer experience at all. Most folks can pick it up on their own if you just tell them "only click once". Since the icons are labeled, most can grasp the purpose of them without being told.

You can re-assure them by saying "it took you a while to learn to double click so don't be too alarmed if you find yourself running things twice"

You can promote Puppy Linux by spreading the information that there is a Puppy Linux Derivative used in Germany for education (Technics, Mathemathics, Electronics etc) by a Teacher on an official German School ! ! !

I have promoted puppy since 2.17 and I follow the forum regular. But even I must admit that I am getting lost.

I test puppies regular.

Few weeks ago a friend came to me with a question for an os for an older laptop. I opende my wallet, pulled out a USB stick that I alway keep there and booted his laptop from it. It was LXpup... The flavor I was testing that week.
Hè was enthousiastic and I told him to get a Fresh install from the internet.

1 week later hè was , completely confused. Hè downloaded, burned, and tried cd's from wary5, slacko5.4, precise543, macpup. And none worked to his liking.

I am happy with puppy, since I Carry its history, and know roughly what to expect. But for new comers there schould be a single entre point where all doubt is taken away About "mainstream puppy" and what are derivatives.

It was more clear when Barry had the lead. Hè was puppy, but now it is unclear. Barry does something, pesamu does his thing, 01micko another thing. All is fine, but completely confusing to the outside world.

And the forum is not clear in this eather. Wary and racy are in bugs and anouncements. Precise is all over the place, slacko is in projects, and the brilliant lxpup and caroline are in derivatives.

Thank you Barry for your many wonderful distributions of Puppy Linux. I use Puppy Linux exclusively on my older & barebones PC's (older than 8 years). I am slowly, but steadily, converting acquaintances, who don't want to upgrade their hardware or older versions of Windows, to Puppy Linux.

Still, there is a learning curve. Once I've convinced them that Linux applications can do everything they used to do in an older version of Windows on their older hardware they are satisfied.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou can download files in this forum